********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.
Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.
If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
*****************************************************************
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER JONATHAN S. ADELSTEIN
CONCURRING
Re: InterTel Technologies, Inc., Notice of Debarment, File No.
EB-03-IH-0012, FCC 06-92 (June 21, 2006).
Since its inception, the universal service support mechanism for schools
and libraries (commonly referred to as the E-rate program) has opened up a
new world of learning and opportunity for millions of school children and
library patrons. To ensure the continued success of the E-Rate program, we
must remain committed to monitoring, auditing, reviewing and reinforcing
the program. A critical part of our Commission oversight is the use of
debarment, which prohibits bad actors from participating in the program.
Accordingly, I support our decision in this Order to debar Inter-Tel
Technologies from all involvement in the E-Rate program, one of our first
such actions against a corporate defendant.
I concur in, rather than approve, this Order because I would have
supported a longer debarment period. The Commission's rules provide for a
debarment period of three years, which may be extended to protect the
public interest or reduced upon a finding of extraordinary circumstances.
I note that the Department of Justice has encouraged the Commission to
exercise our debarment policy in a way that encourages early and complete
cooperation from defendants, and I recognize that the Commission may take
into account payment of fines and restitution, the length of time that a
provider has not participated, and most importantly a high degree of
cooperation with law enforcement. Even weighing these factors, the
one-year debarment period adopted in this Order falls short, given the
scope and seriousness of the fraud-related activities in this case. Strong
enforcement encourages compliance, and penalties should be substantial
enough to constitute more than just a cost of doing business. In this
case, a longer debarment period would have sent a stronger and clearer
message that fraud will not be tolerated.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-92